The Christian kind, I suppose

Right, you somehow know better than all the scientists and opthalmologists who’ve explained otherwise 🙄

You aren’t born with adult sized eyes. Your eyes grow as you grow, and their growth appears to be regulated by how they’re used. It’s covered in the article, maybe read it?

Sounds like a conspiracy theorist

Though it’s unrealistic to expect them too.

Why is that an unrealistic expectation? That’s how it works in many countries with decent worker rights

The world needs a laugh sometimes.

It was 20 cm long. Or about the length of 2 toothpicks. ‘Brandishing’?

How would we ever understand it, then?

That’s an epileptic seizure waiting to happen…

Have you seen the kind of fines the EU hands out? They’re nothing to sneeze at

I honestly have no idea what you’re trying to say. I appreciated your 1st explanation. The rest, IDK what’s up with it.

Panel 3: They want crispr chicken

I live in Norway, who’s pretending? Not my fault if you make assumptions.

If he hadn’t assaulted her he might have been able to make her pay his dry cleaning bill.

Yes? I don’t quite get the hostility. I’m curious about the legalities, nothing more.

Yeah, it wouldn’t be self defense since he wasn’t in any danger. Possibly provocation as the other commentor pointed out.

Ok, now you’re the one making extraordinary claims. It’s fairly obvious to anybody who stops to think about it that throwing liquids at others is not legal. That she’s not getting charged is a case of partiality on the side of the AG, and is why I’m bringing it up as an injustice. I don’t care if she’s on my side, assault / violence should be a no-no.

assault and violence are not the same thing.

If you want to get semantic… from the Britannica

violence, an act of physical force that causes or is intended to cause harm. The damage inflicted by violence may be physical, psychological, or both. Violence may be distinguished from aggression, a more general type of hostile behaviour that may be physical, verbal, or passive in nature.

It’s damage to belongings, and psychological.

Secondly, that’s about Arizona law and this happened in New York City.

Are you trying to claim that throwing liquids at somebody you dislike is legal in NY?

I don’t even understand what point you’re trying to get at. Are you claiming it’s fine to just toss random liquids at others? My point is they both broke the law, they both should be impartially judged for it. How and why is that even controversial?

https://coolidgelawfirmaz.com/throwing-a-drink-is-assault/

Drink is assault, punch with broken bones is aggravated assault.

Well I’m not advocating for them both to get the same sentencing. He should obviously get a heavier sentence due to severity. I am however not a fan of excusing violence just because I happen to agree with their cause.

“Person who was assaulted, charged with assault”

Personally, I’m wondering why only one side gets charged. Both sides were assholes. Lock them both up.

Buzz Aldrin, punching a flat earther